Same Business, Different City: Southern California’s Zoning Patchwork

Southern California’s fragmented zoning codes can determine where a small business is viable before a building is ever selected.

An indoor cricket and baseball training facility may be classified as a gym, an athletic-instruction facility, indoor recreation, a batting cage, or an unlisted use depending on the city. That classification can determine whether the operation is permitted by right, requires a conditional use permit, or is restricted to certain properties.

When a client wanted to open such a facility, finding an available building was only part of the assignment. The first question was which cities offered a realistic approval path. For nontraditional users seeking industrial space, zoning research has to begin before the site selection.

same operation, different process

In the Corona and Pomona sites we evaluated, the proposed use was permitted by right. Other jurisdictions required additional land-use review.

Jurupa Valley requires site-plan review for most uses, with different levels of review. In unincorporated San Bernardino County, a planner indicated that a traffic study might be required as part of a minor use permit.

Chino presented a different kind of issue. Section 20.21.440 of its municipal code classifies gym and athletic-instruction facilities as major or minor based on characteristics such as facility size, competitions, and equipment. A mechanical ball thrower is specifically listed as one characteristic of a major facility.

The distinction matters because the approval path also depends on the zoning district. Chino’s current code accommodates major and minor facilities in several commercial zones, either by right or through administrative review. In the M1 and M2 industrial zones, however, minor facilities are not permitted, while major facilities will require a conditional-use permit (CUP).

That creates a counterintuitive site-selection problem. The type of building that may make the most economic sense for the business is not necessarily located in the zoning district where the use is easiest to approve. Even something as ordinary as a mechanical pitching machine can change how the operation is classified and which approval path applies.

This was not simply a matter of one city being strict and another being business-friendly. The same operation could be permitted by right in one location, require discretionary review in another, or have no practical path at all.

When Zoning Becomes a Barrier to Entry

Indoor sports facilities can create legitimate planning concerns. Depending on the operation, a city may need to evaluate parking demand, pickup and drop-off activity, peak-hour traffic, noise, occupancy, emergency access, hours of operation, and compatibility with neighboring tenants.

Chino’s code, for example, asks applicants to provide information about class schedules, anticipated attendance, parking, circulation, surrounding tenants, and noise mitigation. Those are reasonable subjects to examine.

A discretionary approval process can require application fees, architectural work, consultant reports, traffic analysis, public review, and months of delay. And, there is still no guarantee of approval at the end. For a startup trying to lease a space, it can make the business plan financially unrealistic before the doors ever open.

For a startup trying to lease space, the uncertainty can be as important as the direct cost. The tenant may have to spend money before knowing whether it can operate, while a landlord may be reluctant to hold a vacant space through a lengthy approval process. A property that works physically and economically can therefore become unrealistic once the entitlement timeline is considered.

Calling an approval “minor” does not necessarily make the consequences minor for the applicant.

A suitable building is not necessarily a permissible one.